Judgment :- (Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order of the District Munsif, Paramakudi dated 20.02.2003 in I.A.No.274 of 2003 in O.S.No.42 of 2003, as stated therein.) This Civil Revision Petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Order of the District Munsif, Paramakudi in I.A.No.274 of 2003 in O.S.No.42 of 2003, granting exparte Interim Injunction, restraining the Revision Petitioners from deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam (Kfhk;). 2. The Second Respondent / Second Plaintiff Dinakaran was served, but not entered appearance. Service regarding the First Respondent / First Plaintiff is incomplete. However, in consideration of the nature of the contentious points involved in this Civil Revision Petition, notwithstanding "not ready Notice regarding the First Respondent / First Plaintiff", the main Civil Revision Petition itself is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 3. Facts necessitated for disposal of this Civil Revision Petition could briefly be stated thus: - The Respondents / Plaintiffs are Residents of Paramakudi Nagar. There is a Government Hospital in Paramakudi Nagar, in which one Medical Officer and Seven Civil Assistant Surgeon are working. The Doctors attached to the Government Hospital are to attend the Court; the Eye Doctor and the Anesthetist generally attend other duties. While so, the deputation of the Doctors from the Government Hospital in Paramakudi Nagar to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugam dislocates the working and attending of patients in Government Hospital, Paramakudi Nagar. The Plaintiffs as the Residents of Paramakudi Nagar have filed the Suit for Permanent Injunction to restrain the Revision Petitioners not to send the Doctors attached to the Government Hospital, Paramakudi on other duty. 4. I.A.No.274 of 2003:- On the date of filing of the Suit in O.S.No.42 of 2003 (20.02.2003), the Respondents / Plaintiffs have also filed this Application to grant Temporary Injunction, to restrain the Revision Petitioners from deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam. On such Application, the District Munsif, Paramakudi has granted exparte interim injunction as under: - "...jhth gpuhjpYk;. I.A.No.274 of 2003:- On the date of filing of the Suit in O.S.No.42 of 2003 (20.02.2003), the Respondents / Plaintiffs have also filed this Application to grant Temporary Injunction, to restrain the Revision Petitioners from deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam. On such Application, the District Munsif, Paramakudi has granted exparte interim injunction as under: - "...jhth gpuhjpYk;. kDtpYk; fz;lgo gukf;Fo muR kUj;Jt kidfspy; gzp epakdk; bra;ag;gl;Ls;s kUj;Jth;fis gpw Ch;fSf;F khw;Wg;gzpapy; mDg;ghky; ,Uf;fj;jf;fjha; gpujpthjpfs; kPJ ,ilf;fhy cWj;Jf; fl;lis nfhhp kDjhuh; - thjp ,e;j nfhh;l;oy; kDf; bfhLj;jjpy; me;jg;go ,e;j nfhh;l;lhh; mth;fs; ,ilf;fhy cWj;Jf; fl;lisf;Fk; nehl;ORf;Fk; cj;jput[ bra;jpUf;fpwgoahy; nkw;go 1?k; vjph;kDjhuh; Mfpa ePh; ,k;kDtpy; ,e;ePjpkd;wj;jhy; gpwpbjhU cj;jput[ gpwg;gpf;fg;gLk; tiu gukf;Fo muR kUj;Jtkidfspy; gzp epakdk; bra;ag;gl;Ls;s kUj;Jth;fis gpw Ch;fSf;F khw;Wg;gzpapy; mDg;gf;TlhJ vd;W ePh; eph;ge;jkha; jLf;fg;gLfpwPh; vd;Wk; jLf;fg;gl;oUf;fpwPh;fs; vd;Wk; ,jd; Kyk; ckf;F cj;jputplg;gLfpwJ..." 5. Aggrieved over the exparte order of Interim Injunction, the Revision Petitioners / The Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Paramakudi and the Joint Director of Health Services, Ramanathapuram District have preferred this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Assailing the Impugned Order, onbehalf of the Revision Petitioners, it is contended that the District Munsif, Paramakudi has grossly erred in granting Interim Injunction without satisfying himself as to the prima facie case. Opposing the maintainability of the Suit, it is contended that the Sovereign function of the Government cannot be interfered with by the Civil Court and that the District Munsif has exceeded the jurisdiction vested in him and the Impugned Order is to be set aside. 6. By granting exparte Interim Injunction, whether there is erroneous exercise of discretion and error apparent on the face of record warranting interference is the only point that arises for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition. 7. We may straight away refer to the contentious point urged by the Revision Petitioners on the maintainability of the Suit for Permanent Injunction, restraining the Revision Petitioners from deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam. Deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam and other places is the sovereign function of the Government, regarding which no Civil Suit could be maintained. The District Munsif has grossly erred in granting exparte order of Interim Injunction when the maintainability of the Suit itself is highly doubtful. 8. Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C provides for Grant of Temporary Injunction. The District Munsif has grossly erred in granting exparte order of Interim Injunction when the maintainability of the Suit itself is highly doubtful. 8. Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C provides for Grant of Temporary Injunction. Temporary Injunction may be granted-- Where in any Suit it is proved by affidavit or otherwise - (a) that any property in dispute in a suit is in danger of being wasted, damaged or alienated by any party to the suit, or wrongfuly sold in execution of a decree, or (b) that the defendant threatens, or intends, to remove or dispose of his property with a view to "defrauding his creditors", (c) that the defendant threatens to dispossess the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit, the Court may by order grant a temporary injunction to restrain such act, or make such other order for the purpose of staying and preventing the wasting, damaging, alienation, sale, removal or disposition of the property or dispossession of the plaintiff, or otherwise causing injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit, as the Court thinks fit, until the disposal of the Suit or until further orders. 9. An Application for Injunction restraining the Revision Petitioners / The Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Paramakudi and the Joint Director of Health Services, Ramanathapuram District from deputing the Doctors to Keelakarai and Mandapam Mugaam does not fall either under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of this Rule. It is a matter touching the function of the Health Department, in which case, the Civil Court ought not to have interfered with the functions of the Government Department – particularly Health Department, which is to function depending upon the urgency and exigency of the situation. Learned District Munsif ought to have raised the question regarding the maintainability of the Suit and ought to have declined the Injunction; more so, an exparte order of interim injunction. 10. In issuing temporary injunctions the tests to be applied are (a)Whether the plaintiff has a prima facie case; (b)Whether the balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff; and (c)Whether the Plaintiff would suffer an irreparable injury if his prayer for temporary injunction is disallowed. Thus, the Plaintiff must show a prima facie case in support of his case. In issuing temporary injunctions the tests to be applied are (a)Whether the plaintiff has a prima facie case; (b)Whether the balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff; and (c)Whether the Plaintiff would suffer an irreparable injury if his prayer for temporary injunction is disallowed. Thus, the Plaintiff must show a prima facie case in support of his case. Before issuing exparte order of injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C. the Court should prima facie be satisfied that there is triable strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff in issuing the Injunction. Interim Orders are not to be granted merely for the sake of asking it. Prima facie case ought to be made and the Court must be satisfied that the interest of justice requires issuance of Interim Injunction. 11. It is to be pointed out that onbehalf of the Respondents / Plaintiffs, no documents seem to have been produced, showing the prima facie case. Plaintiffs have not produced any material showing the deputation of Doctors and the inconvenience being caused in the functioning of the Government Hospital, Paramakudi Nagar. The issue touches the sovereign function and the administration of the Health Department. No legal right is shown; much less infringement of that legal right. The Plaintiffs have not made out a triable issue in the Civil Suit when question arise as to the maintainability of the Suit. The District Munsif has not addressed himself to the seriousness of the questions regarding the maintainability of the Suit and exceeded the jurisdiction in granting order of Interim Injunction and thereby paralysing the functioning of the administration in the Government Hospital, Paramakudi Nagar. 12. The Order of Interim Injunction passed under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C is appealable. Normally in the exercise of Revisional jurisdiction, this Court would not interfere with the exparte order of Interim Injunction. When it is shown that there is improper exercise of jurisdiction, in exceptional cases, exercising the Revisional jurisdiction, the Court could interfere with the Impugned Interim Orders. The case in hand is one such instance where the Impugned Order suffers from perversity. The Interim Order of Injunction has the effect of stalling the administration of Government Hospital, Paramakudi Nagar, causing much hardship to the functions of the Revision Petitioners. The case in hand is one such instance where the Impugned Order suffers from perversity. The Interim Order of Injunction has the effect of stalling the administration of Government Hospital, Paramakudi Nagar, causing much hardship to the functions of the Revision Petitioners. Hence, the Impugned Order is liable to be set aside and this Revision Petition is to be allowed. This Court would have gone into the question of maintainability of the Suit. Since the First Respondent / First Plaintiff has not been served, it is felt that it would not be appropriate to go into the question of maintainability of the Suit by this Court. However, suitable instructions are to be issued to the Trial Court / District Munsif, Paramakudi to dispose of the Suit within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 13. For the reasons stated above, the order of District Munsif, Paramakudi dated 20.02.2003 in I.A.No.274 of 2003 in O.S.No.42 of 2003 is set aside and this Revision Petition is allowed. There is no order as to costs. The connected C.M.P.No.3146 of 2003 is closed. The District Munsif, Paramakudi is directed to expedite the disposal of the Suit in O.S.No.42 of 2003 and dispose of the same in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of this Order.